2019 (7) TMI 1907 - HC - Service Tax

Stay on further proceedings pursuant to the impugned show cause notices - HELD THAT - The Court finds that the SCNs are dated 20th April, 2018, and earlier. Admittedly, as of date, no replies have been filed to the said SCNs. It is pointed out that the Petitioners were trying to get the issues resolved with the Respondents till date and therefore did not choose to file replies. Be that as it may, today the Court is assured on behalf of the Petitioners that the replies to the impugned SCNs will be filed by them without prejudice to their rights and contentions on or before 31st August, 2019. The Court further directs that the proceedings pursuant to the impugned SCNs will conitnue in accordance with law, but no final orders of adjudication will be passed till the next date of hearing. List before the Registrar on 2nd September, 2019 for completion of pleadings - List before the Court on 14th November, 2019.

Summary

Issues: Stay of proceedings due to impugned showcause notices

The judgment addresses the issue of stay of proceedings due to impugned showcause notices. The petitioners sought a total stay of further proceedings following the impugned showcause notices (SCNs) dated 20th April, 2018, and earlier. However, as of the current date, no replies had been filed by the petitioners to the said SCNs. The court noted that the petitioners had been attempting to resolve the issues with the respondents without filing replies. The court acknowledged the assurance from the petitioners that replies to the impugned SCNs would be filed by 31st August, 2019. Consequently, the court directed that proceedings pursuant to the SCNs would continue as per the law, but no final orders of adjudication would be issued until the next date of hearing. The case was listed before the Registrar for the completion of pleadings on 2nd September 2019 and before the Court on 14th November 2019.

This judgment highlights the importance of timely responses to showcause notices in legal proceedings. It emphasizes that while attempts to resolve issues outside formal legal channels are commendable, proper legal procedures must be followed to ensure a fair adjudication process. The court's decision to allow the proceedings to continue, subject to the filing of replies by the petitioners, demonstrates a balance between facilitating resolution efforts and upholding the legal requirements for a thorough examination of the case. The timeline provided for filing replies and the directive to withhold final adjudication orders until the next hearing date indicate a structured approach to case management, ensuring that all parties have the opportunity to present their arguments effectively. The mention of Dasti under the signatures of the Court Master signifies the formal issuance and distribution of court orders for compliance and record-keeping purposes.